City Government

Trigger Happy Coppers Tarnish The LAPD Badge

No two ways about it–The Los Angeles copper who is on a murder rampage is WRONG. There is never any justification for killing just because someone may have done you wrong or pose a potential threat.

That said, we are really concerned about the glossing over of the obvious “hit squad” mentality of the LAPD. Following the unprovoked murder of a commander’s daughter and her fiancé, coppers were assigned to guard houses of others who were named in a “manifesto.”

When two little Latina ladies (rogue cop is a big football player size) drove past a house DELIVERING NEWSPAPERS in a pick up truck similar to the rogue copper, they opened fire and shot the two women from behind as the truck drove away. Both survived.

Just a few blocks away another set of coppers blasted away at yet another innocent citizen, but missed.

There is simply no justification for the behavior and law enforcement across the nation needs to condemn such conduct as “unjustified” and do it before they gather en masse with motorcycles and honor guards at the funeral of the Riverside copper who also fell victim of the rogue copper.

National media and even the L.A. Times have allowed the police to gloss over the shooting of the newspaper delivery gals as, “mistaken identity.” Had it been “positive identity” the summary execution–even of a known murderer– would still be an outrage to civil society and the rule of law.

Here is a comment from Boise Chief Mike Masterson:“Losing an officer to an ambush by an ex-cop is unimaginable, and it has certainly heighten the safety awareness of officers everywhere. Having said that, I noted the hysteria atmosphere in a newscast where I saw marked patrol cars in a circle with officers standing inside waiting for the siege. Unless there is additional information that police haven’t released, the shootings of citizens that followed are unjustified and inexcusable. Where are the “brass” in developing protective stategies for officers and their families, searching for the suspect and more importantly, in managing the mood of their officers so this hyper vigilance doesn’t create additional tragedies?”

Related

Comments & Discussion

Comments are closed for this post.

Losing an officer to an ambush by an ex-cop is unimaginable, and it has certainly heighten the safety awareness of officers everywhere. Having said that, I noted the hysteria atmosphere in a newscast where i saw marked patrol cars in a circle with officers standing inside waiting for the siege. Unless there is additional information that police haven’t released, the shootings of citizens that followed are unjustified and inexcusable. Where are the “brass” in developing protective stategies for officers and their families, searching for the suspect and more importantly, in managing the mood of their officers so this hyper vigilance doesn’t create additional tradegies ?

The new BPD black squad cars bother me, just another sign of building a paramilitary force, not a citizen based police department. The new cars scream attitude. Also the accesories on the car seem excessive.

Would have hoped BPD and the Ctiy would have done some focus groups of citizens on developing the police image and brand, can not imagine any citizen group would prefer such a military look. Concerned there is a disconnect between the toys our boys want, and the image the citizens want for Boise police.

Police need the equipment to do their job safely, I would be a strong advocate for that, but the aggresive tools of the trade need not be thrown in our face.

Rod is right. We are now living in a police state, militarized close to the max. Idaho accepting to be overflown by drones is the last straw, worse than black squad cars.
Repubs are always yammering about the Constitution and protecting citizen rights–but they lay down and die anytime something like this drone proposition comes along.

I’ve been reading those articles too, and have been very concerned how they are glossed over. I heard someone got a good look at pictures of the newspaper delivery truck, and there were at least 39 holes visible.

This guy is crazy, and has infected the officers. I understand wanting to protect people, AND protecting themselves… but they really need to reign some of this in.

They are in a horrible position… I don’t envy the cops for one moment.

Rod, Back in the 1970s, in the wake of the Vietnam War and all of its stupidity and unlawful funny business, some folks from Idaho forced several changes to the way the US operates… Those guys are long gone and the boys with the toys are back to trampling the rights they supposedly swore to defend both here and abroad. Interesting how Mr. Nobel Prize, champion of liberals, has accelerated the drone killings and the liberal Media is silent.

As for stop and frisk… it works, and I support it in places known for the type of crime it prevents. So do curfews. I also think it is a violation of civil rights to a degree… and grossly so when abused.

I believe the recent LAPD wrongful shootings will snowball on them even worse than Rodney King did… Time to start shipping extra fireman to LA perhaps? Depends on if they continue to try to cover it up. Bottom line is we need to be able to trust the cops and if we can’t we need to weaken their powers and firepower. I dislike the ACLU much of the time, but they did come to the aid of even Rush Limbaugh.

Zippo, Obama has continued the Patriot Act and other violations of our civil liberties. I gotta disagree with that. He has also upped the number of drone strikes – but that is overseas, and much different from hyperactive police work we now have here at home. Drones overseas, I don’t really care, but drones here in the US – no way. The media, by the way, seems more interested in drones overseas than drones here. I don’t understand that.

Stop and frisk, as used in NYC, is 100% racially motivated. There is no debate about that.

I considered sending some cash to the ACLU here in Idaho but upon investigation, I found them to be toothless and not accomplishing anything.

The cops are asked by the state and local governments to enforce some really bad law. State and local governments should not have the authority to regulate alcoholic beverages at all, they should not be able to criminalize pot, prostitution, or gambling.

Folks it is this simple. If cops were more concerned with doing what is right rather than protecting their fellow cops when their “brother” does something wrong the public would have a much better opinion of them.
The chief is right to a point, this is unimaginable, things in the LAPD must be even worse than people think, (is that possible).

We are told that these cops are highly trained and have undergone psychological evaluations to weed out those who would snap under pressure. In this instance it would seem that LAPD’s training is woefully lacking. Unfortunately I am not talking about the suspect, I am talking about the cops who shot the elderly woman and her daughter who were delivering news papers.

We have all learned not to be overly surprised with the things cops do in California, we know the Kelly Thomas story. Unfortunately this seems to be the normal reaction for cops there.

What is scary to me is just how many cops in this valley are ex- California cops. I feel for cops in a way they have a tough job to do but, unfortunatly the distrust that the average citizen feels for them is usually brought on by the cops themselves.

The Chief’s comment looks great on the surface. On the other hand, JJ, Rod, and others are correct on most counts. I am having trouble reconciling the 2 messages. I do know that they intimidate me, and I am old and white with a clean record. I can’t imagine how younger folks must feel.

I think the Chief believes what he says. But I also think the Chief’s posting was an ounce of prevention to get ahead of his own officers from posting embarrassing rebuttals in defense of the LAPD shooting up look-a-like vehicles (and the adjacent neighborhood) until they ran out of ammo.

Based on the sheer number of these careless erroneous events during times when they are not on hyper vigilant alert, I support a return to six-shooters and the criminalizing of wrong-address / wrong-person / unnecessary roughness police violence. I don’t see any other way to cause them to respect the civil rights of the innocent.

Wrong vehicle, wrong on suspect ID, wrong sex of vehicle occupants.
These cops were badge heavy, trigger happy and now need to pay for this incident. Now the city of Los Angeles is going to pay the price of what will be a large settlement at the expense of taxpayers. Employment as a police officer makes it their responsibility to be right when they pull that trigger.

Trigger happy cops need to be removed from their jobs sooner rather than later.

I am continuously astonished by the public opinion as well as the guardian here that somehow you believe the manifesto of the lunatic is true. Or that you give him some credit for having been an LAPD officer. He probably worked less than one year on the LAPD and during that time had many problems and was most likely rightfully terminated. For those of you who have never worked a graveyard shift in a black and white I want you to go out and see the difference lighting makes when determining is a car blue or grey? Is it a Nissan a Toyota or a Ford? You want to be startled a bit just watch how newspaper deliverers drive. It takes a while to get used to. Couple that with a guy who has already jumped out of his truck and put 30 rounds of .223 into a black and white and that is why these two trucks were shot at. There are 25,000 cops in the Los Angeles area and this guy mentions a couple of instances of bad behavior and everybody jumps on his bandwagon. That is dissapointing to say the least. Considering what goes on every day in LA the LAPD shows great restraint and professionalism when working with the people they serve. I am sure most of you posting here likely have never even been to LA let alone work there.

EDITOR NOTE–Columbo, I hope you are not currently a copper! (for the record I have worked many graveyard shifts solo on patrol). The issue here has nothing to do with color of vehicle, lighting, past crimes of the suspect or driving behavior of newspaper delivery people. The issue is LA coppers are running scared and opened up on innocent citizens who POSED NO THREAT as they drove away. Even if the trucks had been operated by rogue cop, the shootings were WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. LAPD and even Boise PD policy is to not shoot at a moving vehicle. The Supreme Court has also ruled against deadly force on fleeing felons. Only if the lives of innocent citizens and coppers are at risk can deadly force be used. As Chief Masterson has stated here, the shootings are inexcusable and without justification.

@mc: We are all disappointed and sad about the crazy events set off by a crazy man. However, the Bonnie and Clyde event staged by 7 LAPD officers is never acceptable. I was happy to hear our Chief’s comments and hope he is in charge of his department… many Chiefs are not.

Modern coloumbo, are you one of the former LAPD cops we have working here in the valley? I get a kick out of the, go out at night and see how lighting makes a difference. Here’s something to think about, if you don’t know it’s that bad guy don’t shoot… it’s that simple. And if it is the bad guy driving away from you… you are not in danger…. Don’t shoot… That gun is there for you to use to stop imminent danger. That is something a reasonable person would think cops would be taught in POST, I guess not.

I sometimes wonder what is taught in POST I know Idaho code isn’t. My dad taught me not to shoot at a target I was unsure of, or if there was something behind it I might accidentally hit, something these guys obviously were not concerned with but, that was many years ago when people didn’t shoot first and ask questions later if at all. There is no way an intelligent individual can spin this story into seeing what these cops did was right.

I read somewhere that there were 39 bullet holes (I counted 35 in the picture and I’m sure I missed some) in the truck these two women were in. This amazes me on two different levels. First, one or both of these cops would have had to reload to put 39 bullets into the truck, second how the hell do two Barney Fifes shoot that many times and not kill something? Columbo stated this guy only mentioned a couple of bad acts by LAPD, but many many others have reported a lot more. Are we to think that since a single citizen/cop in LA only sees a couple of cops acting a fool we are not supposed to take the entirety of the reports into account?

To cops everywhere, we hear you all whining about how tough your job is, to this I say no one is making you do the job. To use a phrase that cops love to use MAN UP (they have another version that they like better but I’ll keep it clean) if the jobs too tuff there’s always Krispy Cream.

Dave you put something in your reply that is bothersome, you said that “even Boise PD policy is to not shoot at a moving vehicle” is it the policy of most dept’s to blast away at moving vehicles?

EDITOR NOTE–Policy is changing nationwide. Used to be a cop would jump in front of a vehicle and claim the suspect “tried to kill me with his vehicle.” That was used as justification for shooting at the car. Result was often a car out of control with a dead man behind the wheel or an innocent kid shot across the street as the car sped away in a hail of bullets.

flyhead… you are right… but that rigger doesn’t always have to be on a gun. Any act of over use of force should be handled with the boot, gun, tazer, pepper, or hand/foot. These guy’s are out of control, mainly due to no or very little adult supervision. If a Joe Schmuck stuck a tazer in the crotch of a drunk passed out on a side walk like officer #2 of BPD did a couple years ago he would have been arrested, but that only applies to non cops.

Modern Columbo is exactly wrong. Nobody, in comments or the original article on this site has defended the actions of the former cop.

So what if the LAPD has 25K cops and only a small percentage of the time do they kill or terrorize an innocent person. One time is too many and such incidents and the personnel involved have to be held accountable. And it (accountability) never seems to happen, there or here in Boise.

This rouge cop is getting his own form of justice as many in law enforcement are prone to do. They are not held to the same laws as the rest of society so they are very willing to step outside of it. This rouge cop in LA is indicative of a police state. When he came forward with charges of corruption he was dismissed and blackballed.

If anyone doubts the allegations into corruption, racism and all types of abuses found in the LA police force, let me remind you of Rodney King, or the many other abuses perpetrated by LA police and other police forces elsewhere.

I have had my own run ins with Boise Police for instance, I received serious injuries and even had this Boise Cop draw his gun on me, though I was unarmed and no threat to him. This same officer destroyed evidence relating to this upcoming trail. I am seeking charges against this cop but cops don’t arrest cops, well… unless they go rouge.

I have little trust or faith in anyone wearing a costume with a tin star. I see them all as an affront to truth, as far too many lie. I see them all as empowered brutes, due to the fact that they will go home with pay if they kill someone. If I kill someone, I go to jail and have to make bail and have my life tossed on its ear and then have to use my own resources to prove my innocence. The department (your tax money) pays for their defense and since cops work hand in hand with prosecutors, likely they are never charged anyway.

Equality is justice. No equality, no justice.

I see far to often that those in the public trust, abuse that trust, abuse the very people they are sworn to protect. I have seen the history of police in America and the many abuses merited out at the hands and demands of corrupt public officials. No one should be above the law, but those that represent the law should never be excluded from the highest possible scrutiny of the law or else we will see more rouge cops still as cops, handing out their own form of justice.

It is bad when you need to be as weary of the cops are you do any other thug.

I have to ask this of Dave, why do cops want to go to the gun almost automatically?

EDITOR NOTE–Don’t know they all go automatically. The answer is always “training.” Honestly I call it the “rattlesnake syndrome.” You instill enough fear of rattlesnakes on the trail and every rustle of the brush or clicking grasshopper conjures up visions of rattlers. When coppers are “trained” that everyone they contact is a potential deadly threat, you have trouble. It is a fine line between officer safety and over reaction. Like the rattler analogy, if coppers use caution and don’t step where they shouldn’t, there usually is no problem and they aren’t struck.

thers the problem with the analogy. cops feel they have the right and authority to do what ever they want… when ever they want. I will agree with you it is a training problem. I think it starts with POST and carries through to the training they recieve during their probation and is then further reinforced in the locker room. When so called tuff guys get together they have to play mines bigger. I have always wondered exactlly what the rules concerning office saftey are, it can’t be left up to the individual.

As a police officer, I would agree that there is a serious lack of training where officers shoot into a vehicle without identifying a target.

Having said that, however, I would have to disagree with your closing statement. “Had it been “positive identity” the summary execution–even of a known murderer– would still be an outrage to civil society and the rule of law.”

Idaho law actually justifies using deadly force to stop an escaping person who is suspected of committing a felony when an officer has probable cause to believe their continued freedom poses threat of death or serious injury to themselves or others. California law similarly provides for this.

I don’t think anyone can argue that Dorner doesn’t probably continue to be a threat to people in California.

Idaho Code 18-4011 states in part:

Homicide is justifiable when committed by public officers and those acting by their command in their aid and assistance, either:

3. When reasonably necessary in preventing rescue or escape or in retaking inmates who have been rescued or have escaped from any jail, or when reasonably necessary in order to prevent the escape of any person charged with or suspected of having committed a felony, provided the officer has probable cause to believe that the inmate, or persons assisting his escape, or the person suspected of or charged with the commission of a felony poses a threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or other persons.

EDITOR NOTE–Josh, the assault on the two Latina women by coppers and the shots that missed the innocent men just a few blocks away an hour later vividly illustrate why the cited law is invalid. If we have coppers think its OK to shoot people you THINK are guilty, justice is lost forever. Would a citizen carrying a weapon be justified in shooting the coppers if he felt he was protecting the lives of the two innocent women from crazed coppers with automatic weapons? We need to stop thinking with our guns.

Like I said, I am not condoning shooting people that you haven’t identified as a threat. I am saying your statement that shooting a suspected killer while he is trying to escape is an affront to our legal system and civilized society, is wrong.

The law, and its premise, is valid and has been upheld by the Supreme Court in Tennessee v. Garner. It is not about shooting people because you THINK they are guilty. It is about shooting someone because you believe their continued freedom is a deadly threat to society.

Josh, It seems there is a serious lack of training in most aspects of LE. You justify shooting into a car to stop a person because “the person suspected of or charged with the commission of a felony poses a threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or other persons” isn’t just exchanging one “threat” for another. Being suspected of, or charged with does not mean convicted of I thought that a person was innocent until 12 of “his” peers have adjudicated “him” guilty of the offence. Shooting into a car with a fleeing felon puts everyone in the area at risk, it seems like trading one form of risk for another and to me just isn’t logical. As Dave alluded too having law behind an action might make it legal but, we all know that legal usually doesn’t mean logical or even right.

I have said before and will say again that there is no way an intelligent person can hope to justify these two incidents, even in the dark and scared out of their wits these cops should not have done what they did.

Josh, you may not condone what they did but, you sure are putting a lot of effort into justifying it. Is it the old blue line thing? If you don’t spout the party position you run the risk of being ostracized?

The first premise in your argument, and one that you seem to either be forgetting or are just simply choosing to ignore is this: these people did nothing wrong. They weren’t escaping felons they were newspaper deliverers. Their crime was doing their job at O-dark thirty in a truck that for some unknown reason these two decided posed some sort of threat. The truck was the wrong color and even the wrong make, no LOGICAL reason for the cops to think it was Dorner. We can hypothesize all we want these two cops were WRONG, plain and simple.

The supreme court ruled the way you say, that makes it legal but it sure don’t make it right. This is not the first time the supreme court has been WRONG and I’m sure it won’t be the last.

Here is part of the statute that the court upheld, taken from the first sentence of the syllabus of Tennessee v. Garner – 471 U.S. 1 (1985) “A Tennessee statute provides that, if, after a police officer has given notice of an intent to arrest a criminal suspect, the suspect flees or forcibly resists, “the officer may use all the necessary means to effect the arrest.” Since these two evidently just started blasting away it would seem that they had given no “notice of intent to arrest” thus the two women at the very least had their rights violated to the extreme.

It will never be right (it may be legal) but never right, for a cop to shoot an innocent person who is posing no threat to anyone at the time, or to shoot an accused person who is posing no imminent threat to anyone. I don’t care how much case law you can quote your position is completely untenable, at least to reasonable and prudent people, I guess that the reasonable and prudent clause is another exception to normal standards LE is afforded. It is no wonder most people are leery of LE.

It seems there is nothing in POST training that requires you to make sure that the target you are engaging is actually who you think it is even kids with BB guns are even told to be sure of their target before they shoot.

This type of attitude is indicative of Big City Cops (an LA based LE organization) their motto in English is “let them hate so long as they fear”. That is a sad testament to the attitude of a very large number of LE, some members of Big City Cops live right here in the valley, believe it or not.

It is very disheartening to know that my tax money is used to pay people who have so little regard for those who they serve yet will go to such lengths to try to vindicate their “brothers”.

Overreaction.
Chief, I hope you come back and reads these posts along with the other local media posts. The common denominator is “the police overreact”.

The recent child kidnapping- 1 armed man in a buried bunker and look at the huge force called out to respond to that.

The LAPD shooting up that truck-and the occupants still survived. So even if it had been a justified incident, the perp would have gotten away. Maybe a little more practice on the range and little less trigger pull.

YET the Chief says it’s “unjustified and inexcusable”. That sounds like some of the BoisePD incidents of recent years. Erasing evidence tapes among the nonviolent examples of this. Let’s consider how the BPD recruits LAPD officers and how many of them are actually in BPD.

Eastern, you are right they over react.. they say they show up inforce.. to ensure the saftey of all invloved.. They do not care about anyones saftey but their own. If a cop shows up on a call his or her number one goal is to put someone in jail, even if they have to push until someone gets fed up and stands up for their rights.

I for one would like to know how many former LAPD cops we have in the valley. I would imagine that info would be classified or would at the very least require a FOI request to be submitted by a lawyer. I do know for a fact that individual BPD lists on their site as a contact for individuals interested in employment is formerly one of LAPD’s finest.

EDITOR NOTE–If you really want to know, just contact the POST COUNCIL listed in the state pages of the phone book under Idaho State Police. They have all the CERTIFICATIONS which would show past employment for all coppers. You should ask for: “number of officers formerly employed in California,” given the number of agencies there. LAPD probably wouldn’t have many here, but there are no doubt a fair number from the California system.

I’m not sure how else to put it more plainly then what the officers did in shooting innocent people is wrong..

My argument only applies to the statement made by David that shooting an escaping, known murderer is an affront to our legal system. I have shown the laws and Supreme Court case law backing my assertion that it is not.

That is the only point I am trying to make.

There is no “glossing over” the fact that officers shot unarmed people because they were scared. This will be ruled an unreasonable seizure by the courts and those people will never have to work a day again in their lives. This incident and lack of command/training will likely be used for decades by law enforcement everywhere in assuring it never happens again.

I have come to a new understanding of the phrase “guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. It appears to me that the people in Canada are mature enough to own guns. However, the folks here in the US are not. They are not able to handle weapons… what is wrong with the people in this nation?

WHAT THE COP PERCIEVES IN THE MOMENT IS THE MESSURING STICK OF RIGHT VS. WRONG?

I think your statement is correct – “My argument only applies to the statement made by David that shooting an escaping, known murderer is an affront to our legal system. I have shown the laws and Supreme Court case law backing my assertion that it is not.”

The problem Josh is the unconstitutional leap which is exploiting the laws/findings you outline: Cops, cop unions, and cop lawyers are too often claiming that cops perceived they faced the scenario you outline… Therefore it’s lawful that they proceeded with a violent attack on someone… even if in the aftermath it is determined to be a wrongful/mistaken/overreaction type police battery and violation of civil rights.

There is an unholy alliance between cops, prosecutors, judges, and the federal justice department which is conspiring to trample the civil rights of people in America… and it all starts with this logic of WHAT THE COP PERCIEVES IN THE MOMENT IS THE MESSURING STICK OF RIGHT VS. WRONG. This unconstitutional logic is the result of the American people failing to control the government… and government officials violating their oath of office. This loophole is being exploited by the thuggery mentality which is so prevalent in American police departments. I’ve even seen police reality TV praising the efficiency of the Russian Secret Police(KGB). Police departments in this country will continue to grow more powerful and unruly if they are not externally restricted by the public.

There is hope: The problem police have in the long-term is this: The base of support for bad police behavior is the American middle-class core. This group is only supportive because it rarely has police contact, sees only the sanitized version of last night’s activities on the TV, and has an out-of-site-out-of-mind attitude about everything. However, two things are happening the past few years. 1) The police have expanded their target population to include some in this group. 2) This group is now able to see the facts with their own eyes via the internet. As a result many upstanding Americans are teaching their children not to trust or support the police due to the corruption which even many “good cops” refuse to change. Even the President of the United States, due to his personal experiences has substantial distrust of cops.

Josh, just because the common interpretation of the law says you can… it does not mean that you should. Legally correct can still be an abysmal failure of oath and duty.

This page is not big enough to handle the answer to that question. You will have to narrow your scope ALOT. In all seriousness you hit it in the head it is people that cause 90% of our problems. The current debate is a classic example Josh believes it is right to shoot a fleeing felon down because of what he “might do in the future” while he is correct from a legal stand point from a moral stand point his argument is ludicrous.

Be gentle your use of the term unconstitutional will be an affront to Josh and the rest of LE who read this page. They have a supreme court opinion that says they are right no matter what anyone or anything else says. The constitution be damned.

You said “There is an unholy alliance between cops, prosecutors, judges, and the federal justice department which is conspiring to trample the civil rights of people in America… and it all starts with this logic of WHAT THE COP PERCIEVES IN THE MOMENT IS THE MESSURING STICK OF RIGHT VS. WRONG.
You are exactly right. If a citizen goes to court they are judged after the fact as to whether or not their actions were reasonable and prudent. It seems to be a given, in some circles, that LE will act correctly in all situations, although the evidence shows otherwise. I was taught in a BSU Criminal Justice class (Intro to Policing) taught by a BPD Detective that courts will not examine a cops actions in the same way. His words were to the effect of…the courts will not play arm chair quarter back and decide if the actions in the heat of the moment were correct or not. Sounds real close to what you put in all caps in your post. I still have my notes from class. I wonder why the double standard?

I have said before and I will say again, cops have a tuff job (I have done it as a volunteer). Most people do not like or trust them and that makes it harder. The one thing they do need to remember is most of the reasons people do not like or trust them they have brought on themselves. Feeling like they should not be held to the same standards as regular citizens will drive a bigger and bigger wedge between them and those they are “supposed” to serve.

I think the fact that cops are legally allowed to lie in order to get what they want, like permission to search, detain, whatever, makes citizens fearful of them. They are a part of the LE, criminal justice, incarceration industry. It all works together to keep them employed and the perks and toys rolling in at tax payer expense.
Note that one of the biggest lobbys to promote the continuation of marijuana prohibition is the private incarceration industry.
I would bet a large percentage of BPD cops would pull a gun and fire at you if you were scared and ran even though not under arrest. They can always lie in court and your plea will fall on deaf ears….if you live.

Well it appears the inevitable outcome of this tragic incident has come to pass. Do I feel that this guy should have shot anyone NO but, it does kinda seem like a summary execution.

When people report hearing LE say over their radios, “Hold until we start mop up with fire.” “Still not ready for fire. There’s a lot of smoldering.” “More ammo going off.” “Fire doing quite well. I’m going to let it go.” It raises alot of questions. What would “Hold until we start mop up with fire” mean? Kind of a funny way of saying, keep the fire dept back until we mop up “IE secure” the situation. Fire doing quite well, I’m going to let it go. There is just something not right about these statements.

Of course they burned it down… I might have too considering positive identification, dangerous guy, and confirmed he was alone. A couple years from now they will just shoot a Hellfire missile into it from a drone or helli like they do in Gaza.

I feel bad for the lady who lost her cabin and everything in it, but collateral damage is the price we pay for freedom.

wow… no trial… no judge involved… just yup thats the guy… lets kill him…. no wonder people dont trust cops… there is much more to this… most of which will be covered up

EDITOR NOTE–With that we are done! The suspect is dead and the details will play out in the national media. We gave folks their say. COMMENTS CLOSED. Subsequent comments were just blanket “cop bashing” and were not posted.